Program B: Learning in Practice School Design and Implementation

• In Event: 46.067 - Team/Design Professional Development School: Critical Common Commitments for Teacher Development

Abstract

Program B’s Learning in/through Practice School (LPS) model emerged in response to a set of challenges located within teacher education as well as specific learning needs of a turn-around middle school. These challenges included 1) supporting appropriate differentiation for middle school students (including Response to Intervention staffing) without resorting to tracking, 2) identifying high quality placements for candidates and providing those candidates with a supportive pathway to the teaching profession that makes possible the gradual assumption of responsibility, and 3) finding ways to keep accomplished teachers working with students in high need schools by providing them both new challenges and compensation for new responsibilities (such as mentoring, data analysis and team leadership). School leaders and university partners sought a design that leveraged the resources in one area to solve problems in another. Teaming provided the answer.
Design principles were drawn from Peter Senge’s (1990) image of the “learning organization,” from Lave and Wenger’s (1991) theory of communities of practice in which “legitimate peripheral participation” is a critical feature in the development of novices, and from a desire to identify solutions that would acknowledge varied interests and address multiple problems synergistically (Follett, 1995).
The resulting design was piloted in one site this year and similar efforts are underway for the current school year in several other sites. In the design, masters level teacher candidates take paid positions as teacher residents ($16,000 stipend plus health insurance), compensated by the school district. Modified university based coursework scheduled outside the school day complements the onsite experience. Residents are assigned to teams of teachers (multi-grade and/or multi-subject); each team has an Instructional Leader who not only is compensated for his/her leadership services but also regularly serves in the classroom with students. Residents operate as co-teachers, tutors, small group instructors and, as the school year proceeds, as classroom teachers operating on their own. Planning is a team responsibility throughout the year and common professional time for the entire team is available every day. Teams are able to deploy staff, space, time, and resources flexibly to meet the instructional needs of all students.
In such a setting, the expertise of school personnel is leveraged to provide needed guidance and experience for novices. The talent, energy, and people-power of teacher candidates are leveraged to provide more student-teacher contact and personal attention. The background of university teacher educators is leveraged to support lead teachers and to offer a fresh look at practice. All involved – teacher leaders, licensed teachers, teacher candidates, and K-12 students -- are learning in and through the practice of teaching and the practice of the target discipline.
This flexible structure varies with team decisions. In particular, we highlight two variations: 1) layered staffing in STEM disciplines that includes team leaders, licensed teachers, teacher residents, bench scientists, and mathematicians in collaborative work with large and small groups of students and 2) integrated English/Language Arts (ELA) and Social Studies in a “global literacy” curriculum staffed by teachers and candidates with ELA and History expertise respectively.

Authors

• Emily Pendergrass, Vanderbilt University

• Heather Jo Johnson, Vanderbilt University